Are atheists afraid of God?

[Paul of Tarsus]

In response to Stephen Hawking's quip, "Religion is a fairy story for people afraid of the dark," apologist John Lennox said, "And atheism is a fairy story for those afraid of the light."

Do atheists fear that light aka God? I would answer no assuming I knew atheists to be completely sensible and rational in their rejection of theism, but they very often aren't sensible and rational in their unbelief. In this forum, for example, an atheist said he lost his belief in God when he realized that there are different religions. When I tried to explain to him that those conflicting faiths can be explained as some of them getting a real God wrong, well, it did me no good! It's simply illogical to conclude that God doesn't exist because some people disagree about him. His atheism is obviously based on faulty logic. What's odd about these cases involving atheists using poor reasoning to reject God is that those atheists seem quite reasonable otherwise. My guess is that they fear God and wish that he doesn't exist. Atheism is for them a sanctuary from theism and a hope that reality harbors no scary God.

[brunumb]

The "logic" in the arguments against God (at least in this forum) is as bad or worse than the reasoning employed by your "village Christian."

The "village Christian" you refer to, like the vast majority of Christians and other theists, did not gain their belief in God through logic or arguments. They had their beliefs inculcated into vulnerable minds through indoctrination. Everything else is an attempt at post hoc rationalisation.

Oh, now I see. So that's why village atheists are so much like their Christian counterparts.

The "logic" in the arguments against God (at least in this forum) is as bad or worse than the reasoning employed by your "village Christian." I have trouble believing that anybody can be that stupid as to use such twisted and easily refuted arguments against God.

What logic and arguments that can so easily be refuted are you referring to?

The one concluding that God doesn't exist because we supposedly have no evidence for him is a real howler.

Can we now look forward to your easy refutation? By the way, arguments are not evidence.

[Paul of Tarsus]

The big difference between the way atheists react to the issue of God's existence and the way Christians react the issue of pixies' existence, though, is that few if any Christians actually spend a lot of time and effort trying to demonstrate that pixies don't exist, and neither do most Christians get emotionally involved in the issue of the existence of pixies.

Pixieists don't go around trying to push their beliefs down the throats of everyone they encounter, or try to enshrine aspects of pixie dogma in the laws of the land.

I'm not in favor of aggressive evangelization or basing the laws of the land in a religious group's beliefs to grant them special status, and that includes groups like atheists. So we have no disagreement there. However, that's not relevant to what I posted. I was just critiquing your pixie analogy for not fitting the debate between atheists and Christians well.

It's common for people to doubt their beliefs, and atheists are no exceptions to that rule. There's always that thought in the back of the mind: I could be wrong.

It applies to theists as well. "I could be wrong. Yep, I'm wrong". That could partly go to explaining the decline in Christianity in developed countries.

Oh sure. Theists can be every bit as irrational as atheists often are.

They found him there; he was dead and hanging by his coat from a spike jutting out of the wall that had caught his coat. Evidently he had thought that something had grabbed a hold of him, and his heart failed him.

Evidently? Is this another example of the famed Christian mind-reading skills? Now it even works on dead people. Too funny.

I'm just using a logical deduction. Under the circumstances it seems very reasonable to me that the poor man was frightened by the spike snagging his coat. That's where they found his dead body, after all. In any case, I think this story illustrates well how we don't always feel what we think. Atheists are no different occasionally fearing a God they don't believe in.

[Tcg]

[Replying to Paul of Tarsus in post #1]

There's no need to guess about atheists when so many have expressed themselves quite clearly:

George Santayana Spanish born American philosopher.
“Faith in the supernatural is a desperate wager made by man at the lowest ebb of his fortunes.”

Arthur Schopenhauer German philosopher.
“Faith and knowledge are related as the scales of a balance; when the one goes up, the other goes down.”

Gloria Steinem American journalist.
“It’s an incredible con job when you think about it, to believe something now in exchange for something after death. Even corporations with their reward systems don’t try to make it posthumous.”

Mark Twain American writer.
“Faith is believing what you know ain’t so.”

Xenophanes Greek philosopher.
“If oxen, lions, and horses had hands and could make fashion of art, they would fashion gods in their own image.”

Edward Abbey American writer.
“Whatever we cannot easily understand we call God; this saves much wear and tear on the brain tissues …. Belief in the supernatural reflects a failure of the imagination.”

Natalie Angier Pulitzer-winning science writer.
“I don’t believe in God, Gods, Godlets or any sort of higher power beyond the universe itself. Which seems quite high and powerful enough to me.”

Aristotle Greek philosopher.
“Men create gods after their own image.”

Isaac Asimov American biochemist and science-fiction writer.
“Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived.”

Chapman Cohen British activist.
“Gods are fragile things; they may be killed by a whiff of science or a dose of common sense.”

Benjamin Disraeli English politician and novelist.
“Where knowledge ends, religion begins.”

Thomas Edison American inventor.
“Religion is all bunk.”

Benjamin Franklin American statesman and inventor.
“The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason.”

Sigmund Freud Austrian physician and psychoanalyst.
“The whole thing is so patently infantile, [religion] so foreign to reality, that to anyone with a friendly attitude to humanity it is painful to think that the great majority of mortals will never be able to rise above this view of life.”

Ernest Hemingway American writer.
“All thinking men are atheists.”

Stephen King American novelist.
“The beauty of religious mania is that … logic can be happily tossed out the window.”

Michel de Montaigne French essayist.
“Man is certainly stark mad; he cannot make a worm, yet he will make gods by the dozen.”

https://www.atheistalliance.org/about-a ... -atheists/

Not a single mention of fear of god/gods.


Tcg

[Paul of Tarsus]

From my observations of and interactions with atheists as well as the studies I have read on this topic, I have discovered that there are a variety of reasons why some people don't believe in God.

Yes, and those reasons to be atheistic go well beyond "lack of belief in gods." Atheism isn't nearly as passive as a lot of atheists claim but is often an active denial of God.

So many Christians make this assumption - they are really misidentifying [thus misrepresenting] what an atheist is [as a position]

What you are actually describing are atheists who have shifted their position from the inactive "lacking belief in gods" to the active "arguing that gods do not exist" which is a sub-position of atheism - usually "non-theist" or "anti-theist"...The OP is actually more describing the anti-theist position than the atheist one.

I'm really not here to argue semantics, but let's just define an atheist as a person who doesn't believe in God. So do people who don't believe in God fear God or fear that God exists?

Why not call those ones anti theists, because anti-theist atheists fit the description. Do anti theists fear the Christian God turning out to be the real God? I have no examples either way. I suppose one would need to examine why they are anti-theist and what would make them fear the Christian God specifically.

I said I'm not here to argue semantics. It doesn't matter what you call a person who doesn't believe in God. What matters is that person's possibly fearing God despite the claim of unbelief.

How is it reasonable to conclude that if people cannot agree on something, then that something doesn't exist? Some scientists disagree with other scientists regarding how the moon formed, so do you then conclude that the moon doesn't exist? There is disagreement regarding the moon's formation, so to be "reasonable," you need to be an "amoonist."

Of course, coming to that conclusion is nonsense, so why is coming to such a conclusion regarding God any different?

Off the top of my head, "Because the moon is there". [How the moon came into existence is another issue.] No scientist in your example is arguing that the moon does not exist.

There you go, William! You just debunked the proposition that disagreement about something means that that something doesn't exist. We can disagree about the moon, but as you say, it's still "there." Why don't you use the same logic with God?

However, the analogy is skewed because an atheist lacks belief in something which cannot be pointed to like the moon and agreed together that it surely does exist.

You're moving the goalposts here. You claimed it's reasonable to conclude God doesn't exist because people disagree about him, and then seeing that that logic obviously doesn't apply to the real world, you have posted an additional stipulation that when disagreement fails to disprove something, then you assert that physical evidence is then needed to prove or disprove a claim.

I agree that the multiplicity of religions is a problem for theism or at least monotheism, but to say it disproves God is presumptuous at best.

It is a weak argument I agree. It is more likely a shorthand off the cuff remark intended to portray a dislike for religion than for every idea of a Creator.

You have it, William! What you posted here is my point although I would add that fear of God can also lead to the use of fallacious and weak arguments to deny him.

When people disagree, then we know that some of them must be wrong, but to say they are all wrong is a fallacy.

To say that they are all right is also fallacy.

Who's saying that religions are all right? I'm not saying they're all right.

[Paul of Tarsus]

[Replying to Paul of Tarsus in post #1]

There's no need to guess about atheists when so many have expressed themselves quite clearly:

George Santayana Spanish born American philosopher.
“Faith in the supernatural is a desperate wager made by man at the lowest ebb of his fortunes.”

Arthur Schopenhauer German philosopher.
“Faith and knowledge are related as the scales of a balance; when the one goes up, the other goes down.”

Gloria Steinem American journalist.
“It’s an incredible con job when you think about it, to believe something now in exchange for something after death. Even corporations with their reward systems don’t try to make it posthumous.”

Mark Twain American writer.
“Faith is believing what you know ain’t so.”

Xenophanes Greek philosopher.
“If oxen, lions, and horses had hands and could make fashion of art, they would fashion gods in their own image.”

Edward Abbey American writer.
“Whatever we cannot easily understand we call God; this saves much wear and tear on the brain tissues …. Belief in the supernatural reflects a failure of the imagination.”

Natalie Angier Pulitzer-winning science writer.
“I don’t believe in God, Gods, Godlets or any sort of higher power beyond the universe itself. Which seems quite high and powerful enough to me.”

Aristotle Greek philosopher.
“Men create gods after their own image.”

Isaac Asimov American biochemist and science-fiction writer.
“Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived.”

Chapman Cohen British activist.
“Gods are fragile things; they may be killed by a whiff of science or a dose of common sense.”

Benjamin Disraeli English politician and novelist.
“Where knowledge ends, religion begins.”

Thomas Edison American inventor.
“Religion is all bunk.”

Benjamin Franklin American statesman and inventor.
“The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason.”

Sigmund Freud Austrian physician and psychoanalyst.
“The whole thing is so patently infantile, [religion] so foreign to reality, that to anyone with a friendly attitude to humanity it is painful to think that the great majority of mortals will never be able to rise above this view of life.”

Ernest Hemingway American writer.
“All thinking men are atheists.”

Stephen King American novelist.
“The beauty of religious mania is that … logic can be happily tossed out the window.”

Michel de Montaigne French essayist.
“Man is certainly stark mad; he cannot make a worm, yet he will make gods by the dozen.”

https://www.atheistalliance.org/about-a ... -atheists/

Not a single mention of fear of god/gods.

Do you believe them based solely on what they say? And here I thought that only religious people put their faith in their saints. I see no denial of fearing God, either, so I don't think those quotations are relevant to the issue we're debating.

[Aetixintro]

[Replying to Paul of Tarsus in post #1]

As Lennox Lewis suggests, I think there are psychiatric facts for the positions for both Religious and Atheism. Atheism being the slippery slope for relativism and denial of any morality as seen so often here at the forum.

Christianity has shown, historically, to support both mental and physical health so there is no problem there, but how to get through life in one piece and to Heaven too as a worthy person? I say toughness and hard work, eyes wide open, people!

[William]

Off the top of my head, "Because the moon is there". [How the moon came into existence is another issue.] No scientist in your example is arguing that the moon does not exist.

There you go, William! You just debunked the proposition that disagreement about something means that that something doesn't exist. We can disagree about the moon, but as you say, it's still "there."

Actually I was paraphrasing something I read yesterday which Neil deGrasse Tyson had said. He was referring to the whole known universe.

Why don't you use the same logic with God?

While I do in my own way, The Creator is unlike the moon [or universe] in that one cannot simply point to The Creator and say "There She Be."

Rather, what one has to work with, are various images of The Creator as presented by various Christian [and other religious] beliefs and how these beliefs dress up The Creator in said images.

One is free to assume therefore that no images of The Creator are actually true images of The Creator, therefore "nothing to point to". really.

However, the [moon] analogy is skewed because an atheist lacks belief in something which cannot be pointed to like the moon and agreed together that it surely does exist.

You're moving the goalposts here. You claimed it's reasonable to conclude God doesn't exist because people disagree about him, and then seeing that that logic obviously doesn't apply to the real world, you have posted an additional stipulation that when disagreement fails to disprove something, then you assert that physical evidence is then needed to prove or disprove a claim.

What I am doing is showing that I understand the logics of the condition of lacking belief in gods. One does not lack the belief in the moon because the moon is not there to see.

It is you who claim that this cannot be a logical position to hold

Only is as much as something is claimed as physical, is there the requirement to provide physical evidence.
As far as those who reject the claims of the invisible images of The Creator go, these too require some logical reasoning by which said images can be rejected. Such as "The Image presented is a monstrosity" or even "The image presented is a mixture of good and evil" etc...

So no - the goalpost are still where you placed them.

I agree that the multiplicity of religions is a problem for theism or at least monotheism, but to say it disproves God is presumptuous at best.

It is a weak argument I agree. It is more likely a shorthand off the cuff remark intended to portray a dislike for religion than for every idea of a Creator.

You have it, William! What you posted here is my point although I would add that fear of God can also lead to the use of fallacious and weak arguments to deny him.

It is that addition which I see no logic in. What has "fear of The Creator" got to do with it, really? It is a religious claim that purports therein, there is 'wisdom' to be found.
Soiled undies and folk dropping dead with soiled undies are really all that is to be found therein. Hardly evidence of The Creator/The Creators assortment of claimed punishments to be handed out to unbelievers.

Look at it this way. A mother tells her children not to do something or the boogie man will eat them up. One child refrains from doing what the mother has told it not to do. The boogie man never shows.
On the other hand, the child's twin disobeys the mothers commands, and also experiences the same result. The boogie man doesn't show.

There are better ways in which to educate children than to use fictitious entities to get them tow the line and wizen up.

There are also detrimental ripple effects involved with using evil fictional characters to stress a point.

So therein, the logic is that - while there may indeed be some number of atheists who fear the Christian boogie man, by and large there are not enough to make the claim that all [or a majority] of atheists deny the existence of The Creator because "fear".

Rather, such a claim obviously comes from someone [yourself in this case] who believes that there is something to fear in denying the existence of The Creator and then projecting that fear you have onto 'atheists', as in "Atheist's must also fear God",

The claim makes no logical sense.

You fear God too much to deny God. That is your belief re the image projected onto The Creator - to the point - an image you were told believe in as The Truth and have chosen to support and project into the world. Fear of that image is what propelled you, did it not?

When people disagree, then we know that some of them must be wrong, but to say they are all wrong is a fallacy.

To say that they are all right is also fallacy.

Who's saying that religions are all right? I'm not saying they're all right.

Were you not implying that at least one of them is 'right'?

[Miles]

[Replying to Paul of Tarsus in post #1]

As Lennox Lewis suggests, I think there are psychiatric facts for the positions for both Religious and Atheism. Atheism being the slippery slope for relativism and denial of any morality as seen so often here at the forum.

And who doesn't go to Lennox Lewis for insight, wisdom, and guidance.

Christianity has shown, historically, to support both mental and physical health so there is no problem there,

Like the discredited conversion therapy championed by Focus on the Family, and the Christian Coalition' and the American Family Associations' opposition to comprehensive sex education in public schools.
......................................................


.

[Tcg]

Christianity has shown, historically, to support both mental and physical health so there is no problem there, but how to get through life in one piece and to Heaven too as a worthy person?

Not so fast. A recent study shows otherwise:

Study Examines Religious Experiences and Depression

Summary: While attending religious services is generally associated with improvements in mental wellbeing, a new study reports spiritual experiences and belief in divine leading can lead to an increased risk of depression, especially in men.

Source: Westmont College

A national study examines the link between religious experiences and depression by following more than 12,000 American adolescents from their teens into middle adulthood. The research indicates that attending religious services staves off depression, but it also ties life-changing spiritual experiences and a belief in divine leading and angelic protection to an increased risk for depression, especially in men.

https://neurosciencenews.com/religion-depression-17753/

The trick seems to be to not take spiritual experiences seriously if one wishes to avoid depression. Sure, go to church, eat the crackers and drink the Welches, but don't take it seriously.


Tcg

[Paul of Tarsus]

Off the top of my head, "Because the moon is there". [How the moon came into existence is another issue.] No scientist in your example is arguing that the moon does not exist.

There you go, William! You just debunked the proposition that disagreement about something means that that something doesn't exist. We can disagree about the moon, but as you say, it's still "there."

Actually I was paraphrasing something I read yesterday which Neil deGrasse Tyson had said. He was referring to the whole known universe.

Did he say something that relates to people disagreeing about something and that something's nonexistence? I like Tyson, too, and I'll bet he doesn't conclude that things don't exist if we cannot agree about them. That would go for what Tyson thinks about God not existing.

Why don't you use the same logic with God?

While I do in my own way, The Creator is unlike the moon [or universe] in that one cannot simply point to The Creator and say "There She Be."

You have a point there, but your point does not support the contention that things don't exist because we disagree about them. You jumped from saying it was reasonable to say something doesn't exist because people disagree about it to saying that something exists even if people do disagree about it! In other words, you are contradicting yourself.

Rather, what one has to work with, are various images of The Creator as presented by various Christian [and other religious] beliefs and how these beliefs dress up The Creator in said images.

The same thing has been done with the moon. Do you conclude that the moon doesn't exist because people "dress it up" differently? Of course not. So why treat the moon's existence one way and God's existence a different way? It looks like special pleading to me.

One is free to assume therefore that no images of The Creator are actually true images of The Creator, therefore "nothing to point to". really.

Can people assume that some images of God are "true images"? Yes they can, so what you're saying here does not in any way falsify belief in God.

What I am doing is showing that I understand the logics of the condition of lacking belief in gods. One does not lack the belief in the moon because the moon is not there to see.

But what does any of this have anything to do with disagreement over something's existence?

It is that addition which I see no logic in. What has "fear of The Creator" got to do with it, really? It is a religious claim that purports therein, there is 'wisdom' to be found.
Soiled undies and folk dropping dead with soiled undies are really all that is to be found therein. Hardly evidence of The Creator/The Creators assortment of claimed punishments to be handed out to unbelievers.

You're really losing me here.

Let me conclude this post by pointing out that these terrible arguments from atheists indicate that there is indeed something going on underneath the surface. It's hard for me to believe people could honestly use such fallacious reasoning. If people fear God, then this kind of argumentation makes more sense. If a person is desperate to free herself from God, then she may do anything to do so, and that includes using completely unreasonable arguments.